WIPO’s New Treaty on Traditional Knowledge Falls Short of Strengthening Māori Intellectual Property Rights

The issue of biopiracy—the unauthorized appropriation and patenting of Indigenous knowledge—has increasingly drawn international concern. In response, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) adopted the Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Traditional Knowledge in late May 2024. This treaty represents the first global intellectual property agreement to include provisions specifically addressing Indigenous peoples’ knowledge.

Negotiated over more than two decades by WIPO’s 193 member states, the treaty aims to prevent the misappropriation of traditional knowledge and genetic resources. On its surface, it appears to be a significant step toward combating biopiracy worldwide.

However, the treaty’s impact on New Zealand law and the rights of Māori to own or control their intellectual property and taonga (treasured possessions) is expected to be limited. Despite well-documented cases of Māori knowledge and taonga being misappropriated, the treaty does not introduce substantive new protections for Māori interests.

Several studies have documented instances where non-Māori businesses have sought patents and plant variety rights related to native plants, such as mānuka, without consulting or obtaining permission from Māori communities. These practices highlight ongoing challenges in safeguarding Māori mātauranga (traditional knowledge).

A key feature of the WIPO treaty is the introduction of a “disclosure of origin” requirement. Patent applicants must disclose the country of origin or source of genetic resources involved in their claims. Additionally, if an invention is based on traditional knowledge, applicants must identify the Indigenous peoples, local communities, or other sources from which that knowledge was derived.

While this disclosure requirement has been described as a historic advance, New Zealand’s Intellectual Property Office (IPONZ) already mandates that patent applicants indicate whether their inventions involve traditional knowledge or might conflict with Māori interests. IPONZ can refer such applications to the Patents Māori Advisory Committee, which assesses whether the invention derives from Māori traditional knowledge or indigenous flora and fauna.

The advisory committee also evaluates whether commercial exploitation of the invention would contravene Māori values. Based on this advice, IPONZ may reject patent applications on grounds of morality or public order. Consequently, the treaty’s disclosure-of-origin provision does not represent a dramatic change for Aotearoa New Zealand.

The treaty does require domestic laws to implement measures addressing failures to disclose origin information. However, the sanctions are limited: unless fraudulent behavior is proven, a granted patent cannot be revoked, invalidated, or rendered unenforceable solely due to nondisclosure.

This is an improvement over the current situation, where no sanctions exist for failing to disclose traditional knowledge or genetic resource origins. Nonetheless, the treaty’s remedies remain modest.

Notably, the final treaty omits more robust protections that appeared in earlier 2023 draft articles. Those drafts proposed frameworks granting Indigenous peoples and local communities exclusive collective intellectual property rights over their traditional knowledge.

They also envisaged rights to fair and equitable benefit-sharing from the use of traditional knowledge, rights of attribution, and protections ensuring the integrity of traditional knowledge use.

The absence of these provisions in the final treaty means it does not establish positive protections for Indigenous knowledge. Furthermore, it fails to safeguard traditional cultural expressions—such as music, dance, art, and handicrafts—that embody Indigenous cultural practices.

In summary, while the WIPO treaty marks progress in recognizing Indigenous knowledge within international intellectual property law, it falls short of delivering meaningful protections or rights for Māori traditional knowledge and taonga. More comprehensive legal reforms and protections remain necessary to address the ongoing challenges of biopiracy and cultural misappropriation in New Zealand.